Disciplinary action for poor spelling

[SarEl]

The OP could ask for each employees E-mails over the last year, pointing out each and every grammatical error, it would clearly be a case of victimisation, I'm sure the management have many errors in theirs.

 

Yes they could ask. And they would be refused. This would be a breach of data protection legislation for other employees mail to be handed over to a third person. Whether work related or not. Access to employees e-mail is restricted to the employer and for legitimate purposes (which is why employers require policies in place to even access their own employees e-mails!).

[rebel11]

Maybe, but if the 'e-mails' are relevant to the proceedings and will help clarify the issues and allow the Employment Tribunal meet the overriding objective of the Tribunal, which is to deal with the case justly.

Yes they could ask. And they would be refused. This would be a breach of data protection legislation for other employees mail to be handed over to a third person. Whether work related or not. Access to employees e-mail is restricted to the employer and for legitimate purposes (which is why employers require policies in place to even access their own employees e-mails!).

[SarEl]

Maybe, but if the 'e-mails' are relevant to the proceedings and will help clarify the issues and allow the Employment Tribunal meet the overriding objective of the Tribunal, which is to deal with the case justly.

 

No. A tribunal is not above the law and cannot order disclosure of documents in breach of the law. But that isn't really relevant or necessary. As I said previously, unless there is already a final warning in place, a dismissal on this matter would not be proportionate unless the performance aspects had been addressed appropriately and no improvement had taken place. This would be sufficient to argue a strong case that the dismissal was unfair in any case - assuming a dismissal took place. If there is only a warning, however, as I said earlier, this would have no relevance to a possible future dismissal for other reasons, even if the warning still stood on record.

[Surfer01]

Surely if the spelling and grammar checks were activated in the email program, it would remove most errors including poor grammar? IMHO the spelling and grammar is just an excuse. I have seen letters from solicitors where the grammar and spelling was that bad that it was beyond belief. This raises the point of why we can't have a spell checker in CAG?

[honeybee13]

Sorry to go off topic again, surfer01 and everyone else. Spellcheck doesn't tell you if you've got the wrong word, only that you've spelled the wrong word right. And being 100 years old, I don't always agree with the Americanised grammar either!

 

My best, HB

[Surfer01]

Sorry to go off topic again, surfer01 and everyone else. Spellcheck doesn't tell you if you've got the wrong word, only that you've spelled the wrong word right. And being 100 years old, I don't always agree with the Americanised grammar either!

 

My best, HB

True but you can select UK English!

[honeybee13]

Meteor, I notice we haven't heard from you since 5th January and the meeting was that afternoon. Could you let us know what happened please?

 

Sufer, I don't think that helps much. Must be because I learned grammar 100 years ago .

 

My best, HB

[ForestChav]

True but you can select UK English!

They still get it wrong.

[meekmeek]

to original poster

it is expected that a employer wishes to show a professional image to customers and clients but unless the employer has a team of oxford university scholars with masters degree's in english then they should not expect perfection

 

we are human - aint we

 

in most cases employers have specialised templates for employees to use when corresponding to clients - customers or even use a computer system which includes a spell-grammar check

 

if the company wants to appear professional then it is for them to spend the money to be professional not for them to employee average humans like ourselves and expect miracles

 

was there a IQ test as part of the interview process or a dictionary handed to every employee with a contracted chore to learn it cover to cover lol

 

have they had investigations prior to disciplinary about this same matter and have they supplied relavant support to aid you in the future ie spell check

 

what level of mistakes is it exactly are you unable to access a pc with spell check or do your opening statements to clients look like this

 

"yo bro' - i iz ritin u dis letr bout a faild pAment due n laz munf"

 

my questions are worded in a joking way but answering them can help us suport you more and please no one count the numerous spelling and grammar mistakes i had i was lazy in this post for a reason lol

 

also keep that "ironic letter" informing the employee of the disciplinary as this alone is good ammo as a defence to show what level of professionalism the company require - by producing a letter with grammar and spell mistakes shows they do not require 100% compliance

 

i know someone that handed in a similar letter with red penned circles around the errors and just then said this is the evidence of what level of accuracy and professionalism the company requires if you wish to proceed in this matter any further then another meeting should be arranged with a solicitor present as this is a case for harassment and victimisation

 

and the employee and witness walked off and the matter was dropped

 

this was a extreme example of what could be done at the meeting and i personally wouldnt recommend it but keep that ironic letter as it is THAT POWERFUL

Edited January 8, 2011 by meekmeek